by Marco Lelli
As it is well known a recent series of experiments, conducted in collaboration between CERN laboratories in Geneva and the Gran Sasso National Laboratory for Particle Physics, could have decreed the discovery of the transmission of a beam of super-luminal particles.
Experimental data indicate that the distance between two laboratories (approximately 730 km) was covered by a beam of neutrinos with an advance of approx 60 nanoseconds with respect to a signal travelling at the relativistic limit speed c (which takes a time interval of the order of 2,4.10-3 s to perform the way).
Neutrino beam starts from CERN and after travelling 730 km through the Earth’s crust, affects lead atoms of the OPERA detector at Gran Sasso laboratories. Production of neutrino beam is due by the acceleration and collision of protons and heavy nuclei. This event produces pions and kaons, which then decay into muons and νμ.
The initial energy of neutrino beam is 17 GeV and its composition is almost entirely due to νμ.
Publication of the OPERA experimental data immediately got a deep world mass-media echoes: the possible confirmation of the results of the experiment seems to imply an explanation leading to change our current thoughts about theory of relativity and, therefore, the intimate space-time nature. In this assumption c may not be considered a speed limit on the quantum scale investigation.
In this paper we try to show how the uncertainty principle and the oscillation in flavor eingenstates of neutrino beam may provide a possible explanation for OPERA’s data.
Our research assumes two basic hypotheses.
First approximation: approximation in number of flavor eigenstates (and then in mass eigenstates) within is supposed to play neutrino oscillation.
We consider this oscillation between two flavor eigenstates. Then we assume that each component of the neutrino beam can be described by a linear combination of two eigenstates of flavor. These two eigenstates are: μ flavor (the flavor of neutrino beam generation) and τ flavor.
Oscillations in this two flavor was already observed in first half of 2010 within the same OPERA experimental series.
Although, as it is known, the neutrino oscillation cover three mass eigenstates for its complete description, we assume here an approximation for dominant mass of neutrino τ, which reduces the description of neutrino propagation in a linear combination of only two mass eigenstates.
In this approximation we can now describe the propagation of each neutrino produced at CERN as a combination of two mass eigenstates as follows:
Flavor and mass eigenstates are related by a unitary transformation which implies a mixing angle in vacuum similar to Cabibbo mixing angle for flavor of quarks:
then
Second approximation: we suppose that propagation of neutrino beam is in vacuum. The propagation in vacuum is determined by the temporal evolution of the mass eigenstates
We can consider valid this assumption, at least in first approximation, because matter interacts in particular with νe and less with νμ and ντ.νe weakly interacts with matter by W± and Z° bosons while νμ and ντ only by Z° bosons. So the principal possible effect consists in a massive transformation of νe in the |νμ› eigenstate.
Considering the small number of νe in starting beam we can neglect this effect.
Assuming that in the initial state only νμ are present in the beam, through a series of elementary steps, we can get
then we can obtain the probability
In the approximation mμ « Eμ we can write
and finally the transition probabilities between eigenstates of flavor
νμ beam produced at CERN propagates as a linear superposition of mass eingestates given by the following relation
This superposition generates an uncertainty in propagating mass neutrino that grows over time and is equal to
This uncertainty in the mass eigenstates of the neutrino implies an uncertainty in the energy of propagation.
Given the relativistic equation
taking the momentum of propagation p=cost, the uncertainty linked to neutrino mass eigenstate is linearly reflected in an uncertainty in the propagation energy:
Therefore we have
Following the uncertainty principle we have
so the uncertainty (12), about the value of νμ energy of propagation, causes a corresponding uncertainty in its time of flight between the point of production and the point of arrival.
This uncertainty is expressed as follows:
In OPERA case available experimental data are:
Assuming sen²2θ12=1, in analogy with the value attributed to Cabibbo quark mixing angles, and a value for Δm12 ≈ 10-²eV ≈ 1,6.10-²¹ J we have
then
(14) shows that the advance on the propagation of neutrino beam, detected in the execution OPERA experiment, is between the range determined by the uncertainty principle.
The advance Δt is then interpreted by the uncertainty principle and the neutrino flavor oscillation during propagation. This oscillation implies an uncertainty in the neutrino propagation energy, due to the linear superposition of its mass eigenstates, which affects the uncertainty of its flight time.
According to this interpretation, therefore, the results of OPERA experiment, if confirmed, would represent not a refusal of the condition of c as a relativistic speed limit, but rather a stunning example of neutrino flavor oscillation according to physics’s laws known today (uncertainty principle and speed limit c).
The range indicated in (14) depends on the competition of two factors. On one hand, the intrinsic nature of inequality of the uncertainty principle, on the other our fuzzy knowledge of Δm12 between mass eigenstates of neutrinos with different flavors.
One of the most convincing experimental proofs of flavor neutrino oscillation is the lack of solar electron neutrinos measured experimentally respect to the theoretically expected flow.
OPERA, as well as other tests, was designed to observe possible flavor oscillation in a neutrino beam running along the earth’s subsurface. Any oscillation can be found by observing a change of flavor in a fraction of neutrinos in the arrive.
However, if this happens, neutrino mass eigenstate is described by a linear superposition of mass eigenstates of pure muon neutrino and tau neutrino.
This condition generates an uncertainty on the propagation energy, which translates into an uncertainty on the flight time.
This is directly proportional to the total flight time and the square of the difference between the mass values of the different flavors of neutrinos, while it is inversely proportional to the total energy of the beam.
In this interpretation, therefore, the advance of the flight time of the neutrino beam with respect to the velocity c, far from being a refutation of the relativistic speed limit, is a good demonstration of neutrino flavor oscillation.
So we could use the advantage Δt in an attempt to determine, more accurately, the value of Δm12.
On the other hand, examples of physical effects equivalent to a super-luminal propagation of particles are considered in other fields of contemporary theoretical physics. Hawking effect about the emission temperature of a Black Hole is, under this respect, a very significant example.
Cosmic neutrinos flavor oscillations. We can now consider what could be the value of the advantage Δt respect to the time of flight of c in the case of neutrinos coming, for example, from a SuperNova explosion.
In this case the average energy of neutrinos νe is of the order of 10^7 eV and the time of flight, for example in the case of SuperNova 1987a, of the order of 10¹² s.
Under these conditions we have
and it is conceivable that it may start a continuous sequence of oscillations in mass eigenstates.
The logical consequence of this situation is a superposition of two equally probable mass eigenstates.
We lose the information of to the initial state of the emitted neutrino along the way.
So the uncertainty in mass eigenstates exists with respect to the state of arrival of the neutrino and a mixing of mass eigenstates with the same probability equal to ½.
In this hypothesis we have
therefore an advantage Δt of approx six orders of magnitude lower than in the OPERA case.
Interpretation of the principle of uncertainty used above. The uncertainty principle is commonly intended as an aid to explanation for the impossibility of determining, by observation, contemporarily the position and momentum of a physical system, with absolute precision, because the one excludes the other.
Assuming this interpretation the uncertainty principle could explain , in the case of OPERA, a set of measures centered on an advance Δt=0 with a spread on the obtained measurement results in the order of (14).
In contrast, the experimental measurements provided by OPERA appears to be centered on a value of Δt ≈ 60 ns in advance respect to the time of flight of c!
Which explanation is therefore possible to give to the application of the uncertainty principle to justify the consistency of the data provided by OPERA with the fundamental laws of physics known today?
The most coherent interpretation seems to be as follows: the temporal evolution of the neutrino mass eigenstate introduces a temporal evolution in the state of total energy that interacts with space-time producing a reduction of the time of flight. This interaction has to be coherent with the uncertainty principle.
Energy gained or released by neutrino, during oscillation, must be released or gained by space-time, according to the principle of conservation of energy.
A more accurate explanation will require the introduction of some new hypotheses.
We suppose below that space-time possesses a quantized structure. We define a fundamental 1D string element that has the dimension of a length or a time. This fundamental element is a 1D vector in the 2D string wolrdsheet: we call this element the quantum of space-time.
To each 1D of space-time is associated a 1D energy-momentum vector (the total energy associated to a quantum of space-time) that is related to the module of the 1D quantum of space-time with a relation of constraint that we define below.
To introduce the basic unit of space-time we introduce the Polyakov 2D string action and we proceed to its quantization finding the 1D elementary quantum of space-time
Now we want to consider (17) in the limit n -> 1. The infinitesimal parameters dσ and dτ take the meaning of physically limit movement along, respectively, the spatial direction and temporal direction of the 2D string worldsheet.
We can call these limit movement as follows
Ω^x e Ω^0 take the meaning of quantum of space-time in space direction and time direction in the 2D string worldsheet.
Therefore, in this case, to each spatial direction of the elementary string element corresponds a temporal direction that, in a Minkowski’s manifold, is orthogonal to the space direction. The relation (18) binds the module of the element of string along the spatial direction with respect to temporal direction, in the case of a Minkowski’s manifold, and have the values lp and lp/c.
Double differentiation
appearing in (17) must now be rewritten taking into account that in a Minkowski’s manifold, for relations (18), we can write
then
Since it is possible to show that 2D string worldsheet action of Polyakov coincides with Nanbu-Goto action
given the relation
and because we have
In a Minkowski’s manifold we have:
Relation (23) was obtained in a Minkowski’s manifold: it is therefore valid in a region of space-time in which the action of gravitational energy is negligible. Under these conditions (23) defines a relation of constraint: the product of the 1D length of the fundamental string element (the length of the module of the quantum of space-time) and the 2D energy-momentum vector of 2D string worldsheet associated with this element is constant and equal to Planck’s constant.
2D energy- momentum vector Eν thus defines the expectation value of energy of empty space that corresponds to the amount of energy needed to increase string length of an element of length lp along ν direction.
Similarly we can define Eν as the 2D energy-momentum vector associated with the increase of a quantum of space-time along ν direction. For these reasons, in a Minkowski’s manifold, (23) takes the form:
valids in each quantum of space-time.
Calculation of the anticipation Δt in the time of flight. (24) can be written taking into account variations in the 2D string worldsheet fundamental element:
multiplying the two members is obtained the variational relation of least action for the elementary 2D string worldsheet:
so we have
and then
From (28) we obtain (13) and the result (14). In (28) the term is an appropriate constant of integration that take in to account vacuum fluctuations of energy of magnitude for the system under investigation.
Conclusions. Conducing our analysis in 2D we quantize the 2D Polyakov string worldsheet action, obtaining a constraint relation that relates 2D energy -momentum vector and the module of 2D elementary string element (the quantum of space-time).
We have therefore assumed that the neutrino flavor oscillation interacts with the energy associated with each element of the 2D worldsheet string (or the space-time) exchanging energy. This exchange is obeying the law of conservation of energy.
This kind of interaction does not require any hypothesis of fifth force, and may, on the contrary, be assumed of gravitational type, in the sense that the energy due to the neutrino mass eigenstates interacts with the energy of the elementary string element with an easy phase overlapping, just as it is with a gravitational mass.
We can therefore assume that neutrino, through the temporal evolution of its mass eigenstates, exchanges energy with space-time. This exchange causes a change, a contraction in the length of the 2D fundamental string element. Integration of this contractions along the path of neutrino flight produces as a result the observed advantage in the time of the flight.
The energy associated with each elementary quantum of 2D string worldsheet in a Minkowski’s manifold corresponds to the energy of empty space-time, ie the vacuum energy of the gravitational field in absence of gravitational source. The target of a forthcoming work will be to show how this vacuum energy is able to produce effects phenomenological equivalent to hypothesis of dark energy and dark matter under certain conditions.
Basing on the assumptions here introduced the same uncertainty principle, from first and irreducible principle of physics, assumes the rank of derived condition through (25) – (28) by a more fundamental principle that is (23).
References:
[1] B. M. Pontecorvo, Sov. Phys. Usp., 26 (1983) 1087.
[2] L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D, 17 (1978) 2369.
[3] S. P. Mikheev e A. Yu. Smirnov, Il Nuovo Cimento C, 9 (1986) 17.
[4] S. Braibant, G.Giacomelli, M. Spurio, Particelle ed interazioni fondamentali, Springer, 2010.
[5] J. N. Bahcall, “Neutrino astrophysics” (Cambridge, 1989); http://www.sns.ias.edu/~jnb
[6] http://www.arcetri.astro.it/science/SNe/sn1987a.jpg
[7] H. A. Bethe e J. R. Wilson, Astrophys. J., 295 (1985) 14.
[8] G. Pagliaroli, F. Vissani, M. L. Costantini e A. Ianni, Astropart. Phys., 31 (2009) 163.
[9] V. S. Imshennik e O. G. Ryazhskaya, Astron. Lett., 30 (2004) 14.
[10] W. Baade e F. Zwicky, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 20 (1934) 259.
[11] A.M.Polyakov, Gauge Fields and Strings, Harwood academic publishers, 1987.
[12] Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam, arXiv:1109.4897.
[13] F. L. Villante e F. Vissani, Phys. Rev. D, 76 (2007) 125019.
[14] F. L. Villante e F. Vissani, Phys. Rev. D, 78 (2008) 103007.
[15] M. A. Markov, “The Neutrino” (Dubna) 1963.
by Marco Lelli
Dear H. Hansson:
First, have a camel, then cure his cough.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Regarding you answer to Mr. Martin.
I think you are doing the right thing. But still, I would not put my bet on it. The theory of how things becomes fuc**ed are universal (if it can it will). It’s not good to become too successful. Both the U.S.A and EU have anti-trust laws. If your goal becomes a reality, your business will be targeted by authorities on both sides of the Atlantic.
Dear dr. Rossi, very good news from you about domestic E-Cat!
Time is coming “fast and furious” like a movie (but this isn’t fiction, it is a wonderful reality) and soon the whole world will see the New Era of energy.
You are explaining your selling strategy:
“…Our sales will go exclusively to our Customers and our Licensees and we will be very much aware of where our E-Cats will go…”
But what about us, the single persons that have already made a preorder of one unit?
Thank you
Italo R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I’m sorry I have to bring this up, but you say that not even pictures of the E-Cat will be available before they are on sale.
While the E-Cat may be a revolutionary device, how can you expect a consumer to buy a product that is from a company that nobody knows about or with performance that is truly revolutionary but has not been independently verified. Where I come from you don’t even buy a melon before you pick it up and smell it.
What kinds of consumer assurance will be provided before the E-Cat is on sale?
Thanks and continued good luck with your invention and hard work. We are really pulling for you but…
L.F.
P.S. Now may not be the time to answer this question and if you drop or ignore it, I will understand. However it does need to be addressed at some point before Autumn, IMO.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
In some of your answers, you wrote that companies that want to distribute and sell e-cats, have to mail you and give a detailed description of their company. You also wrote that licenses will be given for limited geografical area’s, so here my questions:
i) Is Europe covered by one or only a few licenses, or do you give seperate licenses for every country?
ii) As I live in Belgium, how about Belgium? Do you already co-operate with a company in Belgium that will distribute the home-E-cats?
iii) If yess, could you disclose the name of that company (in Belgium)? Whenn will the list of your licensees (companies worldwide that represent you) be given?
iv) Concerning the industrial 1MW plants (and more), are these treated seperately from the home-units? (I think yess) And will industrial clients always have to contact your headquarters (Leonardo Corporation)? (I think yess)
v) Do you already co-operate with Belgian companies/clients (for industrial plants)? Of course I respect if you want to keep this secret…
vi) In autumn last year (2011), I thought ‘maybe I could ask him to represent him in Belgium’, but I am a single person, and I don’t own a distribution company, so I guess this is not possible, also because you probably work via existing and very well established distribution companies? (And don’t worry, I appreciate that, because it proves that you work very professionaly…)
Kind Regards,
Dear Martin:
We started the tests of the domestic reactor. The technology is completely changed, new patents have been applied for, an intense testing program is going on. With very good results. The data are totally covered, we are talking of the unit that will me made in 1 million pcs/year, we will not give any data before the next Autumn. No pictures will be available until the product will be for sale. The strategy with which we will annichilate the competition must remain secret to the last moment. By the way: if there is out there some clown that thinks to buy a bulk of E-Cats, change the body and say”here is our product! We copied it from Rossi because we are the Mandrake of the copycat!” better forget it from now. Our sales will go exclusively to our Customers and our Licensees and we will be very much aware of where our E-Cats will go: no bulk sales outside our sales network, and a price too low to allow a profitable reverse-engineering. By the way: we are receiving very strange and pretty much clownesque requests of pre-order for tens of thousands of E-Cats from the Aegean area…. By the way: all the investors who think to make money investing in companies who are copying our patents, both pending and granted, better prepare an army of attorneys: we will not only make extremely competitive prices, but also will defend in all the competent Courts our Intellectual Property. Better to know this from the very beginning.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Mats Lewan told about à test on 20 februari. Can you tell us some more
About this test? Goal, pictures etc
Best regards,
Martin
Dear Stefano:
1- your pre order has been accepted, of course.
2- Thank you for your suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing. Daniel De Caluwe’:
Thank you.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Roberto 1963:
Our E-Cat module of 10 kW is good for 100 mq.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
To M a r i o
February 27th, 2012 at 8:57 AM
answer to Rob :
1m3 of natural gas delivers 10kw/hour of thermal energy and costs 0,60euro x 24 hours = 14,4euro per day.
for 6 months of continuous operation : 14,4 x 180 = 2592euro.
Rob says that in his country 1kWh cost 0,60 euro
We often see statements that from 1kWh of heat we can get o.3kWh of electric energy.
I wonder how much heat we are getting from 1kWh of electricity from conventional (resistance) heaters.
COP = 6:1 is not completely clear to understand the efficiency, since on one side we have 1kW of electricity, on other side 1kW of heat.
The clear good side of E-Cat is, that it can replace conventional dirty sources of energy, especially coal.
And with possibility of producing electricity it can make household independent from delivery energy from outside sources on daily basis.
Hello
If ECAT will be able to heat only 3 liters of water per minute, I wonder if it will be able to heat the house, because it seems to me that it is too low thermal efficiency. At my house the pump has a capacity of at least 0.5 cubic meter per hour.
Regards
Roberto
Dear Mr. Rossi,
On february 25th, 2012 at 12:33 PM, user ‘Rends’ mentioned a critical article in Forbes magazine:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/02/24/dick-smith-rossi-e-cat-too-fantastic-to-be-true/
Well, this is what I quickly wrote in response to it, one day ago (You can read my answer also on page 5 of the comment-section, below the article in higher link):
“””Daniel De Caluwé 1 day ago
1. (I think starting from january 2011) Untill 28 oktober of last year (2011), several tests has been done on the E-cats, and as a civil electromechanical engineer (from Belgium), I verified some of the previous tests, and they were very convincing to me.
2. On his blog http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/ , Andrea Rossi explained several times why he doesn’t organise any more tests:
– Several tests already have been done, with good result(s), and the latest test (of 28 oktober 2011) was done by an important customer, a company or organisation that doesn’t want to reveal its name (Mr. Rossi has a NDA-agreement with this entity), but who approved the 1MW container plant, and who buyed it. And together with this company or organisation, they improved the control system and the instrumentation, and they are also working on the issue of generating electricity with the 1 MW plant. Also, based on these tests and his coöperation with this major organisation, Mr. Rossi got a lot of investors, that support his company Leonardo Corporation.
– His competitors are very interested in his secrets, especially in the right chemical formula of the catalyser, that is used to enhance the reaction. And because pattent-approvals are still pending, Mr. Rossi doesn’t want to take the risk of doing more tests, that could reveal the secrets to his competitors.
– With his team and the companies that are choosen by his investors, he ‘s working 16 hours a day (7 day’s a week) to also make electricity (starting with the industrial 1 MW plant), and also on an automated production line for the home-ecats, that could be delivered within 18 months (worldwide), hopefully before next winter (in the northern hemisphere), but planned within 18 months. So, Mr. Rossi and his team and co-operators, have no time to do further tests. International approval of his patent(s) still is pending, so he still is not protected by it, and therefore het puts all his efforts in being the first to deliver good working home-ecats, not revealing the secrets of the E-cat to possible competitors. But as soon as pattents are approved, Mr. Rossi wrote he could give more information about the exact working of the E-cats…
Ir. Daniel De Caluwé
Belgium”””
I quickly wrote that message (last sunday) in response (and to your defence) to the critical article in Forbes magazine.
As I believe 100% in what you do, I hope you roughly agree with above answer, and that I didn’t make too much errors?
Kind Regards,
Ir. Daniel De Caluwé
Belgium
Good morning Mr Rossi,
we mailed each other previously about tesla turbines.
Lately, I have been in contact with Mr Pierluigi Paoletti; he is a financial analyst expert of the present economical crysis (his speeches can be found on Youtube and on http://www.scecservice.org: look for the pdf flyer on homepage, italian only).
Since many of his (social and economical aspects) and Your (scientific and technological with social-economical feed-backs) efforts are aiming toward a similar goal, I would be glad of making each other aware of both Your achivements.
At the same time, I would extend this invite to all like-minded people!
Thank You for Your attention and Your work,
Best Regards,
Stefano
PS My preorder for a home ecat was accepted?
Dear Joe:
1- there is no reason to postpone the launch of the domestic E-Cats
2- nobody can give this assurance
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
1. Would you consider postponing the production of the domestic E-Cats in favor of the MW plants if the MW plants show themselves capable of generating electrical power very soon? The reason for this is that modern society is structured around electricity and not around hot water or warm air. Such a decision might prove to be much more beneficial for Leonardo Corporation.
2. Have you received strong assurances from your customer that your MW plant will be protected against industrial espionage?
All the best,
Joe
answer to Rob :
1m3 of natural gas delivers 10kw/hour of thermal energy and costs 0,60euro x 24 hours = 14,4euro per day.
for 6 months of continuous operation : 14,4 x 180 = 2592euro.
have a nice day
Dear Gio:
The 1 MW plants are made with another technology, respect the new 10 kW E-Cats, but they too need the drive.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Don Witcher:
I go to study this.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear H.Hansson:
Yes, the remote control can be made by internet or by phone.
I suggest anyway to let alone the food stuff.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. rossi
I read your reply( here is your answer:..”we need a concentration of thermal energy that the system you proposed does not allow…”) to S. Broenink (here is a part of his question:”…Would it be possible to make a self sustained closed loop of two E-Cats? ……
The 1 MW e-cat has got the same problem and it is not possible to make a self sustained closed loop?
Cordialità
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I think Larry is touching something important.. As many users of eCat will choose to stay “off grid” there are a increasing need to do monitoring on distance, in real time (iPhone??). This will be of importance when you starts to offer electric generators. If the eCat for some reasons makes an emergency stop and there are no back-up units. A power black-out can ruin not only the food in your refrigerator,.. but cause damage to other system as well.
I think this is “the” accessory that will be sold along with your eCat.. even if a basic remote system is included….
Dr. Rossi
Have you considered using a commercial flywheel power system in conjunction with ecats for self sustaining operation? Its a well developed technology that should be adaptable. http://www.vyconenergy.com/pages/flywheeltech.htm Don Witcher
Dear Clauba:
Demineralized water is the solution.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
I was pretty sure that according your declaration, electric power is necessary to start the reaction inside the e-cat.
Answers to S. Broenink and Stephen T. confirm the above.
Nevertheless, to gio’s question “So can i use my gas boiler, with no need to change it, to start up and re-start e-cat ?”, you answered yes.
Therefore, one possible interpretation is that it would be feasible to run the e-cat without electric power (the 1/6 of the thermal power) by using the thermal power of a non-modified water circulating gas-heater (with a normal output of 70 °C water, very common in Italy), to start and control the e-cat.
Maybe it is only a misunderstanding, and I am sorry to dig into contradictions, but could you kindly clarify the meaning of your answer?
Many thanks in advance
Dear Larry:
Good question, the answer is yes. It will be possible also to turn it on and off from remote.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Claud,
I am not able to answer, I do not know the issue: for example, I think that our certification will not allow any use of the E-Cat for tasks not explicitly granted .
It is not just a matter of sterilization ( on this you are right, the steam sterilizes) but I suppose that to deal with food there are requirements that we do not know.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear H. Hansson:
Yes: the air conditioned generator; eventually, the electricity generator.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Enio Burgos:
Your pre-order has been accepted, Thank you!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. A. Rossi,
Wladimir Guglinski is a friend, I am from Brazil too, and I´d like to order one ecat (10 kW), please. Is it possible? Please, let know how to do…
Thank you, best wishes.
Enio Burgos
Dear Mr Rossi,
Every product is associated with some kind of accessory. Like,.. if you sells tennis rackets you can also expect to sell tennis balls to the same customer.
Do you foresee any must-have-accessories for eCat customers??
Dear Mr. Rossi, the steam sterilizes itself the piping as far as no trace of poisoning material outcomes from the exaust. E-cat could therefore be perfectly suitable for steam-cooking. Do you agree?
Regards.
C.R.
Dear Dr Rossi
Thank you for all your efforts make cold fusion a reality.
Will your eCat controller have a wireless capability that would let the customer monitor it with a computer on the same home network. It would be reassuring for your customers to be able to read the temperatures and current draw in real time and could be useful in diagnosing problems and applying software updates.
Thank You
Larry
Dear Mr. Rossi,
have you had any problems with hard permanent water in your devices ?
if any, what is your solution?
Dear Rampado Dr Roberto:
Much more. But of course this has nothing top do with products for sale: as I said, it’s like the difference between a racing car and a regular one.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Stefano:
Please send yourself an info to the guys of the website.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Claud:
I think that the steam from the E-Cat can go in contact with food, but you should maintain the piping perfectly clean for hygienic reasons. I didn’t think to this application before, anyway probably to use something for food there are requirements that , honestly, I do not know.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
p.s. I ban nobody, sometimes comments are spammed by the robot mistakingly.
Dear Mr. Rossi, few days ago I asked whether the steam produced by e-cats can come in direct contact with foodstuff or not. I didn’t find my question in the blog. Did you banned it?
Regards
C.R.
Dear Mr Rossi,
just an information for your informatics: on the ecat.com site, i believe that the “ECAT Energy Cost Calculator” doesn’t work properly. It doesn’t show the costs clicking on the “calculate” key.
Thank you
best regards and good work
Caro Dr Rossi,
L’E-Cat verrà da te venduto con COP minimo di 6 ed è già un grandissimo risultato oltre che pratico anche scientifico, perchè se non altro dimostra che le reazioni LENR termiche esistono e sono utili.
Ma se non sono indiscreto, qual’è il COP massimo raggiunto nei tuoi esperimenti ?
Anche senza dare i numeri precisi, basterebbe una risposta “qualitativa”, tipo poco/ abbastanza/ molto/ moltissimo di più…
Ti si è mai squagliato, fuso o esploso un E-Cat?
Grazie.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
you will sold the E-cat with COP=6 minimum. COP=6 is a great scientific result. At minimum it shows that the thermal LENR exist and they are useful.
But if I am not too intrusive, which is the maximum COP reached in your experiments?
Even without giving specific numbers, a “qualitative” answer such as little / somewhat / very / much more would be enough.
Just for curiosity. Have you ever been able to melt or to explode an E-cat?
Thank you.
Dear Gio:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. rossi
So can i use my gas boiler, with no need to change it, to start up and re-start e-cat ?
Cordialità
Dear psi:
I will visit personally many of the first-year Customers, to check personally how’s going on. When you will have the E-Cat installed send me a memo of this comment.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear S. Broenink:
Yes, you can easily.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear S.Broenink:
You never bugged me.
No, for thermodynamical reasons: we need a conventration of thermal energy that the system you proposed does not allow.
I wish you were right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Stephen T.:
Thank you, we are working with focus on the electric power production: it’s it the way which will bring us to the total self sustaining.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Gio:
Correct,
A.R.
dear ing. rossi
i read the question of bob from Netherlands and your answer too.
As you say the costs are different in each country, so the set up of e-cat allows to use different energy sources,selecting the most economic .
cordialità
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Your newest cooperation with the large turbine/electric company is very good news. I hope they will help you develop something small like this turbine that can fit in your hand. (a bit larger perhaps)
http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2012/02/21/a-turbine-generator-in-a-suitcase/
I spoke to a Siemens representative back in July 2011 about a 300 kW turbine for the 1MW container but there was nothing appropriate to help you then. You have made much progress.
Best Wishes,
Stephen
Sorry to bug you again Mr. Rossi, but I was thinking: Would it be possible to make a self sustains closed loop of two E-Cats? 1/6 of the output of E-cat A will be used to power E- Cat B and 1/6 the power output of E-Cat B will be used to power E-Cat A..
Thanks again!
S. Broenink